Saturday, December 10, 2005

The Marriage Thing Part 3

I have more questions. Blame the cocktails and Bob. If you are a "man-woman-only marriage" (MWOM) supporter, what is your position (wrt being allowed to use the word "Marriage") on the following:1. Straight Man marries Lesbian - no kids2. Gay Man marries Lesbian - no kids3. Gay Man marries Lesbian - they adopt4. Gay Man marries Lesbian - they have children5. Bisexual male marries Bisexual female5. Transsexual Male marries Transsexual female - they adopt childrenetc...

I won't go on. There are far too many possibilities and potential complications (eg say one or both partners did not know about the sexual orientation of the other at the time of marriage), but you get the idea. I guess what I am asking is this: apparently sex matters, but do sexual orientation and gender also matter? Does the truth matter more than the intention?

If other people are drawing lines then I like to know where the lines are and I like the lines to be relatively precise.

Why all these silly and pedantic questions? Well, amazingly Bob agrees with me on the Marriage thing. We rarely agree, so I started to wonder why we would agree on this. I think it is because we both view sexuality as a continuum...a sliding scale. My hypothesis is that MWOM supporters view sexuality as either black and white or a perhaps as a graded scale. Shoot it down if you will.

You've also missed out those sexless beings (male and female) who are just not interested in sex. At all. Causes great problems with their spouse.

I can see where you are coming from on this. I used to not believe in marriage either, so probably would have sided with you on this issue 12 or more years ago. I could probably write alot more, but my thoughts are so politically incorrect, that I'm not willing to go there yet. Reminds me of what a Polish politician said recently on how the West does not allow open discussion on certain subjects.

Yes. I suspect you do know where I am coming from...that if "having and raising children" is the reason for marriage to remain between just a man and a woman...well, that doesn't make sense to me. It would make more sense if only those couples who had children could be called "married."

Perhaps I might even understand a little about where you are coming from.

I am not anti-marriage. In current society, I'd say a happy marriage is a great way of doing the child-raising thing. I also think mum/dad staying at home to raise the kids is better. All the questioning and disagreeing is just because I don't fit into that society...ie "if this is what society is then I don't belong here." And that's where some of the pseudo empathy comes from.

I like reading your views and I like that we disagree (and probably always will on some level). I prefer political incorrectness (feel free to be politically incorrect here - although I can't guarantee the behaviour of commenters). I like people to say what they think. Of course, it is more likely to make me disagree, but that's OK, things that offend/upset me are usually the most interesting and important things.

I've read a few and I think most people would agree with them or at least be swayed/challenged by them.

The thing I found interesting is that although they introduced new ideas, none of them challenged my viewpoint. I still disagree with almost all the conclusions. I think it goes to show how important basic worldview is....different people with different worldviews can take the same "facts" and end up somewhere completely different.